BREAD
- 50
- 0
Consider the wavefunctions in each case and the probability distribution at the screen that they entail.BREAD said:And i don't know how to approach (c), (d)
(c) is just sum of l+> + l-> so the answer is same with (b), and i don't know if there is interference between l+> and l+>kuruman said:Consider the wavefunctions in each case and the probability distribution at the screen that they entail.
In case (c), if you were to measure an electron's spin with another Stern-Gerlach machine, would you be able to tell through which slit the electron emerged?BREAD said:is just sum of l+> + l->
I think , in case of (c) , there would be same amount of electron goes through each slit.kuruman said:In case (c), if you were to measure an electron's spin with another Stern-Gerlach machine, would you be able to tell through which slit the electron emerged?
What about if you did the same with an electron in case (d)?
My question to you was not about amounts of electrons.BREAD said:think , in case of (c) , there would be same amount of electron goes through each slit.
kuruman said:My question to you was not about amounts of electrons.
1. Suppose in case (c) you measured the spin of an electron to the right of the slits and you found it is "up". Would you be able to tell through which slit it went through?
2. Suppose in case (d) you measured the spin of an electron to the right of the slits and you found it is "up". Would you be able to tell through which slit it went through?
kuruman said:So in (c) you know through which slit the electrons have passed through, but in (d) you do not know. Can you put it together now in view of your answers in (a) and (b) and what you know about quantum interference?
It's not a matter of intensity. If the electron flux is the same in all four cases, then what do you think should be the same in all four graphs?BREAD said:But, is it right that i have to draw a half intensity in (c),(d) compared to (a),(b)